Remember the last new, old political phrase? It included the word "gravitas".
Mario Cuomo started it all when he slung it around liberally on the Charlie
Rose program just prior to the 2000 campaign. It was something along the
lines of, "Bush's sense of gravitas", or "there is a question
of gravitas here", or, "the Republicans are lacking in gravitas."

Typical of the sheep mentality on which liberals and Democrats depend,
and with which they are so familiar, their fondness for anything resembling
a sound bite sent "gravitas" to the top of the charts with a
bullet. In a matter of days everyone in liberal circles and the media
was sporting "gravitas" like Nehru shirts at a love-in.

Liberals and Democrats come up with all the new ones. They popularized
classics like "diversity" and "multiculturalism" as
friendly, fuzzy words to describe their even newer word, "inclusion",
and that real beauty, "tolerance". But they are much better
at words and phrases with negative connotations such as, "homophobia",
"vast right-wing conspiracy", "hate-crime", and that
all time, sinister favorite, "what did he know, and when did he know
it?"

Their latest is, "connecting the dots", a reference to the
child's game in which a picture can be created by drawing lines from dot
one to dot two etc. It sounds innocuous enough, but it is not. In fact,
like Ebola, it jumped species. Some Republicans have caught the virus
and are in danger of making it a part of their vernacular. In the political-speak
of the 21st century, it is supposed to conjure images of an incompetent
Bush Administration bungling its way through the War on Terrorism. Being
married to, "what did he know, and when did he know it?" makes
for a simple, wide-ranging, and compelling condemnation without having
to bring facts into the mix. Democrats therefore seized on the phrase
the same way they did "gravitas" two years ago, and they are
using it ad nauseum.

Conservatives and Republicans seem to be stuck with words and phrases
from a bygone era. They talk about "courage", "patriotism",
"family values", "morality", "rugged individualism",
and "faith in God." All very boring to liberals, and quaint
in an anachronistic way to the media.

Whenever Republicans use their words and phrases, they run the risk of
sounding like precisely what liberals and Democrats have designed their
new words and phrases to describe. If a Republican talks about "morality"
or "family values", liberals call him a "homophobe"
or "bigot". When conservatives bring up "equality",
liberals talk "affirmative action".

Liberals are not satisfied with just their new words and phrases however,
they are unabashed when it comes to redefining old ones for their new
purposes. "Homosexuality" is now "pedophilia", but
only as it applies to Catholic priests, not the North American Man-Boy
Love Association. Those men are simply "expressing their sexuality".
"Human rights" describes what white people refuse blacks. "Entitlement"
is just another way of nicely packaging the redistribution of wealth.
It is also another word for "welfare". "Abortion"
is legal murder just as is "mercy-killing" ("euthanasia"
confuses the great unwashed). When conservatives bring up God within the
context of a political discussion, liberals pull out "separation
of church and state" even though they know the Constitution means
"no state sponsored religions". Pornography, once a clearly
defined word, is now another way of saying "freedom of speech"
in their new language.

We conservatives and Republicans have to come up with a new way of saying
old things. But I am not sure how we would describe morality and decency
as anything other than "morality" and "decency". Perhaps
there are very creative conservatives out there who could come up with
some new words for our tired, old beliefs. But then, it is the bane of
conservative philosophy that the core of our existence precludes any such
activity. Truth cannot be redefined.

Peter Fusco has written for The Utica Daily Press, Recycling Today
and Summit Magazine and is putting the finishing touches on a new book.